.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
The Expansionist
Wednesday, December 29, 2004
 
Gun Lobby Sophistry. It is inconceivable, as John Lott argues, that people are safer the more guns there are floating around. Suicides and accidents alone account for a significant number of deaths that would not occur were guns simply unavailable, and rage-induced injuries and deaths that could not happen absent a gun surely matter. I have never heard of a "drive-by knifing".
+
Lott wants us to believe that the drop in many types of crime over the past several years, and especially during the Brady ban, are mere coincidence that would have happened anyway. Not credible. It makes as much sense to argue that laws restricting access to guns are useless as it does to argue that laws against robbery and murder are useless so should be abolished, because the people who are going to do these things will do them whether there are laws against them or not. But would anyone seriously entertain the notion that laws against murder are a bad idea? I suspect John Lott would. After all, he wrote a book called More Guns, Less Crime. He wants us to forget about all those societies like Canada that have fewer guns and much less crime. Mere illusion. Sure they are. Sure.
+
(Responsive to "Shooting Blanks", op-ed piece by John R. Lott, Jr. in the New York Post, December 29, 2004)
+
(Little Milestone: I think, but am not sure, that this is the 200th post to this blog.)

- posted by L. Craig Schoonmaker @ 1:29 PM




<< Home

Powered by Blogger